Scientists are increasingly using Twitter as a tool for communicating science. Twitter can promote scholarly discussion, disseminate research rapidly, and extend and diversify the scope of audiences reached. However, scientists also caution that if Twitter does not accurately convey science due to the inherent brevity of this media, misinformation could cascade quickly through social media. Data on whether Twitter effectively communicates conservation science and the types of user groups receiving these tweets are lacking. To address these knowledge gaps, we examined live tweeting as a means of communicating conservation science at the 2013 International Congress for Conservation Biology (ICCB). We quantified and compared the user groups sending and reading live tweets. We also surveyed presenters to determine their intended audiences, which we compared with the actual audiences reached through live tweeting. We also asked presenters how effectively tweets conveyed their research findings. Twitter reached 14 more professional audience categories relative to those attending and live tweeting at ICCB. However, the groups often reached through live tweeting were not the presenters' intended audiences. Policy makers and government and non-governmental organizations were rarely reached (0%, 4%, and 6% of audience, respectively), despite the intent of the presenters. Plenary talks were tweeted about 6.9 times more than all other oral or poster presentations combined. Over half the presenters believed the tweets about their talks were effective. Ineffective tweets were perceived as vague or missing the presenters' main message. We recommend that presenters who want their science to be communicated accurately and broadly through Twitter should provide Twitter-friendly summaries that incorporate relevant hashtags and usernames. Our results suggest that Twitter can be used to effectively communicate speakers' findings to diverse audiences beyond conference walls.

No abstract

Future demands for increased food production are expected to have severe impacts on prairie biodiversity and ecosystem integrity. Prairie avifauna of North America have experienced drastic population declines, prompting numerous conservation efforts, which have been informed primarily by small-scale studies. We applied a large-scale perspective that integrates scale dependency in avian responses by analyzing observations of 20 prairie bird species (17 grassland obligates and three sagebrush obligate species) from 2009–2012 in the western prairie region of the United States. We employed a multi-species model approach to examine the relationship of land ownership, habitat, and latitude to landscape-scale species richness. Our findings suggest that patterns and processes influencing avian assemblages at the focal-scale (e.g., inference at the sampling unit) may not function at the landscape-scale (e.g., inference amongst sampling units). Individual species responses to land ownership, habitat and latitude were highly variable. The broad spatial extent of our study demonstrates the need to include lands in private ownership to assess biodiversity and the importance of maintaining habitat diversity to support avian assemblages. Lastly, focal-scale information can document species presence within a study area, but landscape-scale information provides an essential complement to inform conservation actions and policies by placing local biodiversity in the context of an entire region, landscape or ecosystem.

No abstract